Hypatia
trying to be a very good ENTP
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2011
- Messages
- 615
On July 20, 2017, [MENTION=20790]Zangetshumody[/MENTION] attempted to start a discussion regarding the SJW psyche and how it could possibly be interrelated with other MBTI psyches and/or concepts that we are beginning to understand or learn from a different perspective. (Reference - Forum / The Academy / Politics, History, and Current Events (Temporarily Closed) / Psychological Politics, its HAPPENING, on my poor quality youtubes)
Unfortunately, I let many personal issues get in the way of having an open and honest discussion with him concerning the issues, concepts, or patterns he was exploring.
Although the disagreements we had are in some ways still emotionally raw, I don't think that this should bar me issuing an open apology, and although I still don't feel brave enough to analyze how I specifically derailed the thread, as I feel that currently performing such a close analysis would restimulate me emotionally in a negative way, I still think that a general apology issued from my memory should be good enough, although I don't want to be overly presumptuous or arrogant in (issuing that) that statement.
I let my own personal issues and insecurities involving my own psyche limit me from exploring the issues he was raising, and I very immaturely derailed his thread with specious concepts and tactics. Once again, I feel very uncomfortable about specifically reading my immature posts, but I feel that in general, the nature of my analysis is for the most part correct.
Okay, well, on further reflection it seems useless to an issue an apology without a more careful analysis of what exactly I did, so I will bite the bullet, as I'm feeling slightly braver and better now.
1) It was wrong for me to impute authoritarian motives to his own analysis. I think ideally, this forum should stand for the free exchange of ideas and information, and what I did, which was slander his character and/or his reputation, completely detracted from that and muddied the waters on the points he was trying to raise. Ironically, I do believe what I was trying to do can be subsumed perhaps under the general concept of identity politics, but in my specious self-deception and attempt to deceive the group, I was hoping that no one would notice.
2) Fascism is the for the most part wrong. In a weird way, I still believe it can be practical, but perhaps I'm conflating concepts of humans being "wolf pack"-social in nature rather than emphasizing a more forward-thinking freedom and collective responsibility mindset. Thinking about this concept more carefully, I remember that in a college philosophy class, my professor (who I believe was an INFP, but I'm not exactly sure how this concept might be relevant) talked about how everyone has a different form of expertise, and there ought to be some concept of shared, organic leadership that can be decided or passed or negotiated as circumstances or context allows. Although I am not sure if this could be translated or has some correspondence in a viable political framework, it certainly seems to largely oppose fascism in theory.
If fascism will indeed continue to be a problem for human political organization, then it ought to be something that we all can more frankly and openly contend with, especially if there are structures or psychological functions or capacities within ourselves that give us permission to muddy the waters if someone raises a legitimate criticism or objection.
I'm sincerely sorry for my large role in speciously derailing the thread. It was utterly irresponsible, mean and sadistic, and childish of me to try to distract from more serious, open, and authentic communications about concepts and patterns that we ought to be more forthright in addressing, even if it might be painful or uncomfortable for some of us, and I have included myself in that category, although I am trying to overcome my various and numerous and some severe and serious immaturities.
I hope that [MENTION=20790]Zangetshumody[/MENTION] would graciously come back and address and contend with my more frank and forthright position and apology as I have stated in this post, and that as a forum, we could maybe also think more deeply and critically about the issues I have raised and strive to be a more open and gracious community with respect to when someone is bringing genuine communication to the table, as I see it, as I believe those instances are few and far between, and I'd like to encourage open and honest exchange more than I see it currently being practiced (again, myself included.)
Unfortunately, I let many personal issues get in the way of having an open and honest discussion with him concerning the issues, concepts, or patterns he was exploring.
Although the disagreements we had are in some ways still emotionally raw, I don't think that this should bar me issuing an open apology, and although I still don't feel brave enough to analyze how I specifically derailed the thread, as I feel that currently performing such a close analysis would restimulate me emotionally in a negative way, I still think that a general apology issued from my memory should be good enough, although I don't want to be overly presumptuous or arrogant in (issuing that) that statement.
I let my own personal issues and insecurities involving my own psyche limit me from exploring the issues he was raising, and I very immaturely derailed his thread with specious concepts and tactics. Once again, I feel very uncomfortable about specifically reading my immature posts, but I feel that in general, the nature of my analysis is for the most part correct.
Okay, well, on further reflection it seems useless to an issue an apology without a more careful analysis of what exactly I did, so I will bite the bullet, as I'm feeling slightly braver and better now.
1) It was wrong for me to impute authoritarian motives to his own analysis. I think ideally, this forum should stand for the free exchange of ideas and information, and what I did, which was slander his character and/or his reputation, completely detracted from that and muddied the waters on the points he was trying to raise. Ironically, I do believe what I was trying to do can be subsumed perhaps under the general concept of identity politics, but in my specious self-deception and attempt to deceive the group, I was hoping that no one would notice.
2) Fascism is the for the most part wrong. In a weird way, I still believe it can be practical, but perhaps I'm conflating concepts of humans being "wolf pack"-social in nature rather than emphasizing a more forward-thinking freedom and collective responsibility mindset. Thinking about this concept more carefully, I remember that in a college philosophy class, my professor (who I believe was an INFP, but I'm not exactly sure how this concept might be relevant) talked about how everyone has a different form of expertise, and there ought to be some concept of shared, organic leadership that can be decided or passed or negotiated as circumstances or context allows. Although I am not sure if this could be translated or has some correspondence in a viable political framework, it certainly seems to largely oppose fascism in theory.
If fascism will indeed continue to be a problem for human political organization, then it ought to be something that we all can more frankly and openly contend with, especially if there are structures or psychological functions or capacities within ourselves that give us permission to muddy the waters if someone raises a legitimate criticism or objection.
I'm sincerely sorry for my large role in speciously derailing the thread. It was utterly irresponsible, mean and sadistic, and childish of me to try to distract from more serious, open, and authentic communications about concepts and patterns that we ought to be more forthright in addressing, even if it might be painful or uncomfortable for some of us, and I have included myself in that category, although I am trying to overcome my various and numerous and some severe and serious immaturities.
I hope that [MENTION=20790]Zangetshumody[/MENTION] would graciously come back and address and contend with my more frank and forthright position and apology as I have stated in this post, and that as a forum, we could maybe also think more deeply and critically about the issues I have raised and strive to be a more open and gracious community with respect to when someone is bringing genuine communication to the table, as I see it, as I believe those instances are few and far between, and I'd like to encourage open and honest exchange more than I see it currently being practiced (again, myself included.)
